Cited by 1,543Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMotor Control and AdaptationNeural dynamics and brain function

Neural Mechanisms for Interacting with a World Full of Action Choices

Cisek, Paul, Kalaska, John F.·2010·Annual Review of Neuroscience

Abstract

The neural bases of behavior are often discussed in terms of perceptual, cognitive, and motor stages, defined within an information processing framework that was originally inspired by models of human abstract problem solving. Here, we review a growing body of neurophysiological data that is difficult to reconcile with this influential theoretical perspective. As an alternative foundation for interpreting neural data, we consider frameworks borrowed from ethology, which emphasize the kinds of real-time interactive behaviors that animals have engaged in for millions of years. In particular, we discuss an ethologically-inspired view of interactive behavior as simultaneous processes that specify potential motor actions and select between them. We review how recent neurophysiological data from diverse cortical and subcortical regions appear more compatible with this parallel view than with the classical view of serial information processing stages.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.neuro.051508.135409

Cites

211 of 211 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The phylogenetic progression from primitive homeostatic control to goal-directed control rests on the hierarchical elaboration of more primitive architectures.

    “This phylogenetic progression rests on the hierarchical elaboration of more primitive architectures (Cisek and Kalaska, 2010, Pezzulo and Castelfranchi, 2009).”

    From Active Inference, homeostatic regulation and adaptive behavioural control (2015) · cites this paper as Cisek and Kalaska, 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 212 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cisek, P., & Kalaska, J. F.
Affiliations
Université de Montréal (CA)
Venue
Annual Review of Neuroscience
Published
2010-06-01
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
269-298
ISSN
  • 0147-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4126
OpenAlex
W2118125647
Cited by
1,543
References
212
Citations by year
2026: 98 · 2025: 109 · 2024: 97 · 2023: 105 · 2022: 114 · 2021: 109 · 2020: 139 · 2019: 96 · 2018: 92 · 2017: 81 · 2016: 101 · 2015: 108 · 2014: 103 · 2013: 77 · 2012: 59
FWCI
4.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annual Review of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
neural mechanisms of behavior, ethology, interactive behavior, action selection, parallel computing, neurophysiology, cortical and subcortical regions, animal behavior
MeSH terms
Animals, Behavior, Cognition, Decision Making, Humans, Movement, Neural Pathways, Neurons, Psychomotor Performance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review